For weeks i have been pondering on this issue, numerous discussions on that and finally I like to have that discussion here. I am not sure whether this has been posted or not, too many topic to look through in this forum...
Million dollar question. Homages watches. Acceptable or not.
Accusation
Homage watches, despite its clever interpretation of what they are doing, in the root share similar principality as stealing. I doubt any of the homage watch maker pay royalty for the design they copied. Under the pretext,
we brand this watch as our own, they get away and being accepted as an original watch where else their cousin, the replica watch take the heat and being label as pure fake and unacceptable. However due to supply and demand, needless to say the industry for both is quite a big one.
Now, i understand the feeling of those who purchase the original watches. Look at as example the rolex submariner owner and the Panerai watches. Two homage one under well known brand Invicta, replicating the rolex submariner and one private small label known as Marina Militare. The idea for those who purchase the original piece is to pay a huge amount of money to enjoy high quality products with a level of exclusivity. They work hard in life to earn it, but being let down seeing their manager who they pay a small amount of money to work with them, wearing an identical watch, at least physically.
That is pain. Even for me who own several homage (which is why now I am judging the morality aspect of owning a homage). Bottom line, an infringement of IP is an infringement of IP. People get away with it with clever definition but are we as user enabling this well organized "crime" in way where we see it as acceptable. How about the billion dollar losses of the original watch maker?
Defenses
a) Once expired, manufacturer has no right to disallowed others replicating their invention
b) The original piece mostly are simply ridiculously expensive. The user of homage watches consist of those who love watches, appreciate the art of watch making but couldn't afford to get the original one in even in gazzilion years of lifetime. Is it fair to deny their enjoyment in owning a homage watch. ?
c) The homage never claim what they dont. The homage watches clearly specify the specification of the watch and the brand of it. They dont pretend
d) The billion dollar losses claimed is not real. It is base on the potential that the owner of homage watches, without the homage watchmaker would spend money on the real manufacturer. But it may not be. They buy the homage because they cant afford the real one. If there is no homage watches, they still cant afford it. True, there is some rich people who can afford to buy the original, but if they in the first place being calculative and decide to buy homage, even without homage they would still be calculative asshole and will not buy from real manufacturer. So there is no real losses.
e) It is not matter of between paying 100 dollar or 200 dollar, often it is between paying a 100 dollar or 20,000 dollar. The math is simple
f) A replica mostly in a poor quality, but not entirely true for homage. Often homage watches in a very good quality, though may not be agreed by some, there has been argument for example the Invicta 9937 match the quality of rolex submariner it replicating. I am sure a lot will either agree or disagree. I dont own any of both, so i cant be sure. But I am sure i have read some very satisfied review on the 9937 even when comparing with Rolex. Base on that review, often they question the justification of buying a Rolex. Simply on the brand ?
Summary
I can not summarize this, part of me feel that it is right to get a homage, part of me feel it is a terrible crime and I am enabling it.What make it worst the law enabling it, the society enabling it. So how do we draw the line ? Would it be acceptable to homage ?
Looking forward to views from all of you .
mnazri.tan
http://zhenendeavor.blogspot.com/
